The New Age Colossus of Rhodes…
How does one man achieve the position of supposedly being the architect of the conquest of an entire continent? While researching Cecil Rhodes and his methods and devices for the colonisation of Africa, I find myself asking one principal question: What is the fundamental difference between this man and a figure like Adolf Hitler in regards to their complete disregard for human rights in the course of achieving their goals? I personally cannot find many discrepancies between the two. Rhodes` foreign policy in Africa is absolutely appalling. In his “Confession of Faith”, the British Imperialist lays out his vision for Britain, which can only be contextualized by the immense power of the British Empire during his lifespan. Having been born at the beginning of then second half of the 19th Century, Rhodes grew up in a world completely and utterly dominated by the British Empire and the philosophy of imperialism. How could the seeds of his vision for Africa not have been planted in his environment? At the same time, and I say this from a purely objective point of view, one has to marvel at the grandiose nature of his scheme. Of course there were others who wanted the railway from Cairo to the cape completed. However, no one man was committed to its completion such as Rhodes was.
He was making his money in African diamond mines off of the backs of indigenous labourers and therefore spent most of his time in Africa to protect his investment. He was instrumental in the formation of Rhodesia and is viewed by many as one of the fathers of apartheid in South Africa through his British South Africa Company. He believed the Anglo-Saxon race should rule the world. “ I contend that we are the finest race in the world and that the better it is for the human race.” He did not, however, want to stop at the conquest of Africa. He wanted the entire world! “Why should we not form a secret society with but one object: the furtherance of the British Empire and the bringing of the whole civilised world under British rule for the recovery of the United States for the making of the Anglo-Saxon race but one Empire.”
Let us remember that this was not only the most politically influential man in Africa at the time, but also the richest, with a near monopoly on the world’s diamond market that STILL EXISTS TODAY. A quick examination of the positive and negative effects of British colonialism reveals SOME positive after effects, namely improvements in education, industrialization, and infrastructure throughout much of British-controlled Africa. OK, fine. I don’t care. The focal point of my blog begins with the negative effects colonialism: Africans being taxed for everything you can think of, scarcities of land and food for Africans, the attitude that Africans are an inferior race, and mother of all negative side effects, war between feuding colonial powers. Here is the point I’m coming to in spite of the fact that Rhodes used his money to promote the image of a noble liberator of uneducated savages: How on earth should there even be a debate about whether or not Rhodes` statue should be taken down? Do your own research if you like. In my opinion something like that is less of a slap in the face as it is a gun to the head of the peoples of Africa.
